Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Owen

Pages: [1]
Face and Body Scanning / Re: Head scans in the Los Angeles area?
« on: May 10, 2014, 12:36:26 AM »

Hi Alexey,

I've been experimenting with different tolerances, but for this test a tolerance of 8 was used for all masks.

Because the background of the capture stage is white, lighter clothing is sometimes masked out by mistake, requiring a lower tolerance to be set. I use the square select tool and Shift_command_S to do some cleaning on masks, but the other selection tools, such as the intelligent scissors, are too slow/unresponsive to function properly. But that seems to be another issue.

Yes Mac OSX 10.9.2 is being used, I look forward to your findings! :)

Alexey, thank you for your response!

After some further testing it appears the 'Active Chunk' masking becomes less accurate with higher numbers of photos in the project.

I tested a project with only 4 photos and all the batch imported masks were clean. With 10 photos, two photos began to show signs of bad edges, and with 30 photos, even more batch imported masks were showing bad edges.

I will send you an email with a link to download a sample project I shot and ran through PhotoScan this morning. I will include all photos and their correctly named background masks, as well as some screen shots of bad edges I got when I ran the project, and the clean edges achieved when reimported for 'Current Photo'.

Let me know if you need anything else! :)

I've been running into some inconsistent and expensive problems when importing background masks for an Active Chunk consisting of some 70 cameras.

When masks are imported for the whole chunk, the mask edges, on many but not all pictures, are jagged and useless, eating into important pixels of the subject.

Selecting the problem photos one by one and reimporting the masks for the selected photo cleans the jagged edges. All I do is reimport the mask onto the matching photo, the tolerance is left the same.

I've attached a before and after picture. If you guys have any ideas or suggestions please vocalize! All I can think is photoscan needs a more robust masking system.

Pages: [1]